4 ms·

I always hear about how we need to tax, but never about how can we do 2x for the same amount of taxes that are already collected. Gov efficiency needs to be que

I always hear about how we need to tax, but never about how can we do 2x for the same amount of taxes that are already collected. Gov efficiency needs to be questioned and audited. I bet if we just clean up our house, it'd be much bigger than we thought. No newspapers are interested in reporting it, but they'll happily report how we need to tax this or that. I've worked with and in Government agencies. The amount of waste and inefficiencies out competes even the worst of large corporations. When agencies were new (1950-1970), we saw incredible progress and efficiencies. But, there is no one to clean up the crud that's built up over the years. We can't even do six sigma because that itself would become a bureaucratic endeavor. I've seen how six sigma works great in a nimble Japanese manufacturing company, but not so great in American mega corporation. I am not sure what the solution is, perhaps complete abolishment of the agency and starting a new one.

groby_b 4y ago
Your theory falls apart in light of the fact that there are long running government agencies outside the US that are efficient. So, "crud buildup" isn't it, not by itself. There is, however, a good case to be made that the increasing politicization makes the job inherently harder. Statements like "I bet if we just clean our house" are exactly that - it is not a proposal that's in any way actionable, but if enough people say it, there will be increased pressure to justify actions, which creates more bureaucracy. Mind, I'm not saying there shouldn't be accountability. But we must move this discussion away from "Just do <simple slogan>" towards actual analysis, or the side effects of a populist discussion mean that administrative efforts drown in layers and layers of useless ass covering, just to shield from that pressure. Starting from scratch doesn't really solve - or even discover - the underlying problem either. It might be a tool to address issues, but we don't know until we concretely investigate what the problems and root causes are. Alas, that requires serious investment. And I really don't see a political climate where any effort to invest large amounts into rebuilding administrative capacity is successful. We're currently very much in a feedback loop. How to break that is, at least to me, ultimately a question of societal stability.
jltsiren 4y ago
Efficiency is expensive in the short term. It usually requires investments, hiring new people, and spending some time changing the ways things are done. You will only see the benefits in the long term. Politicians often don't get this, and they may even deliberately choose not to get it. In the public sector, "efficiency" is usually a codeword for slashing budgets and assuming that agencies will magically get their work done with fewer resources.

groby_b 4y ago

Your theory falls apart in light of the fact that there are long running government agencies outside the US that are efficient. So, "crud buildup" isn't it, not by itself. There is, however, a good case to be made that the increasing politicization makes the job inherently harder. Statements like "I bet if we just clean our house" are exactly that - it is not a proposal that's in any way actionable, but if enough people say it, there will be increased pressure to justify actions, which creates more bureaucracy. Mind, I'm not saying there shouldn't be accountability. But we must move this discussion away from "Just do <simple slogan>" towards actual analysis, or the side effects of a populist discussion mean that administrative efforts drown in layers and layers of useless ass covering, just to shield from that pressure. Starting from scratch doesn't really solve - or even discover - the underlying problem either. It might be a tool to address issues, but we don't know until we concretely investigate what the problems and root causes are. Alas, that requires serious investment. And I really don't see a political climate where any effort to invest large amounts into rebuilding administrative capacity is successful. We're currently very much in a feedback loop. How to break that is, at least to me, ultimately a question of societal stability.

jltsiren 4y ago

Efficiency is expensive in the short term. It usually requires investments, hiring new people, and spending some time changing the ways things are done. You will only see the benefits in the long term. Politicians often don't get this, and they may even deliberately choose not to get it. In the public sector, "efficiency" is usually a codeword for slashing budgets and assuming that agencies will magically get their work done with fewer resources.